It’s hard to avoid the fact that this woman was somewhat pretty and had a smoking body. … She [was] 39. OK, she has a little bit of dead-doll, fish-glassy-eyed stare, she’s got a tiny mouth … But she’s attractive and she was really hitting the wall hard.

But this aging beauty of 39 — practically an elderly woman at this point, amirite fellas? — was struggling on YouTube and her viewership was falling. Which, as Molyneux sees it, means that

everyone around her was right and she was wrong. And if she’s wrong, it means that she wasted her beauty. She wasted her youth. Because I don’t care how many sit-ups you do, the eggs age anyway. …

So she doesn’t have the fame, she doesn’t have the future … and she’s too old—probably—to get married and have kids.

I guess the logical conclusion from all this is that instead of banning guns we should ban women from getting older than, say, 38? Or, to be absolutely safe, 30? Then we could send them to Carousel, a la Logan’s Run.

Seems like a solution.

Fox News White Supremacist Tucker Carlson blames the shooting on “Toxic Femininity,” and apparently thinks he’s very clever for thinking up this totally new and original joke about an act of terrorism that could have killed many people:

First off, the shooter was a woman. She was female, so clearly America has a problem with toxic femininity, and we’d need to address that crisis right away, starting with more university panels shaming an entire gender. Somebody alert the H.R. department to this.

YouTube making these changes where they’re going from being a platform for videos to being a publisher of videos, meaning that they are starting to censor content here and there, whatever, actually opens them up to liability and it opens them up to a lot of hatred from people around the world.

So, yeah, yet another right-winger who basically thinks the shooter, while “pretty downright crazy even by California standards,” was basically justified in being really, really, really mad at YouTube.

I guess the logical conclusion from all this is that instead of banning guns we should ban women from getting older than, say, 38? Or, to be absolutely safe, 30? Then we could send them to Carousel, a la Logan’s Run.

Leave it to white and male supremacists to mock, joke and belittle everyone in a terrorist attack. But no it’s the feemales who don’t know how to love. And wait I thought it was the feeemales who go for criminals and go on and on about how hot they are? What’s this then?

First off, the shooter was a woman. She was female, so clearly America has a problem with toxic femininity, and we’d need to address that crisis right away, starting with more university panels shaming an entire gender. Somebody alert the H.R. department to this.

No it’s her dad’s fault for picking the wrong mate to have children with and not raising her right and also she didn’t get sex and it’s all the males fault for not giving her whatever she wanted including sex and attention, Nice girls finish last. :tips pink fedora: /Major Sarcasm
Seriouslyhttps://giphy.com/gifs/game-of-thrones-clever-cersei-OZ13TkVY2Ucfe

If YouTube is stricted of censorship then they would have taken down Stefan, pewdiepie, Logan Paul, Evelion, jontron, the amazing athiest, Tommy sotomayor, etc ages ago.

RE: YouTube shooter. So many women fit into this category – late 30s, unmarried, no children. They don’t all go on shooting sprees. This is another case, like Aileen Wournos with serial killers, where the exception proves the rule.

Also, I don’t know why Stefan M. would conclude that because her channel was struggling and views were falling, it naturally followed that everyone else was right and she was wrong. What’s the old saying, “He who is right, has a majority of one” or something like that?

Incidentally, that Carousel scene from “Logans Run” scared the shit out of me when I saw it in a theater more than 4 decades ago. It was the first non-kiddie movie I saw on the big screen.

Wait, what? A somewhat attractive woman at 39? But I thought we hit the wall at 30. In fact, I’ve been counting on it (so that I won’t experience wacky creepy come ons any more). Although it does explain a bizarre conversation I had in the park last year (I’m 45). My mind is officially blown.

“Imagine that you have no discernible talents. You are not very intelligent. You are not particularly athletic. You are not good-looking. You can’t sing or dance well. Your jokes are basic and predictable. You read the newspapers and have political opinions, but, although you may not know it, you are part of the reason newspaper editors have to enforce the standard reading age of eight or under.
However, your need for approval is boundless. And your lust is ferocious and uncontrollable. You demand to be admired by admirable people and sexually desired by beautiful people. These hopeless demands breathe bile into your impotent rage, which soon turns rancid and bitter. Slowly, you come to adjust your entire worldview to support a single proposition: that you are a very objectively impressive person, and that the world’s disinterest in you is evidence of a gigantic conspiracy. The fact that nobody finds you in any way noteworthy is evidence of their intellectual and spiritual deficiency. If people cannot see how impressive you are, it must be because they reject objective facts.”

I once had a student coming up to me after class (I’m a philosophy professor too) asking me whether I knew of the great philosopher Stefan Molinyeux, who had proven that there are objective moral facts. I was like uh no? Weird that I’ve never even heard of this guy? Then I started reading his book on moral philosophy out of curiousity, and… yeah. He’s like “I’ve proven that there are objective moral facts! Something loads of philosophers from Plato to Kant have tried to do and failed, but I have done it!”. And you know, some of the ideas in the beginning of the book (obvs I didn’t continue and read the whole thing) were okay, like, a real philosopher could have taken them and done something worthwhile with them. It’s just that his lack of knowledge about philosophy (you do need to know philosophy to do good philosophy, or else you’re gonna, at best, invent the wheel all over again) and most important of all his enormous hubris completely got in the way of things.

@Dvärghundspossen:
That sounds really awkward. Those I-already-know-everything undergraduates (almost always male) were a constant feature of my time in academia, as was seeing how many of them tended to crash out. I’m sad to hear that people like that went into philosophy; I would have thought that it would have turned them off.

Its his way of belittling the concept of toxic masculinity to people who believe that gender inequality is either not a thing or something very positive (i.e his entire audience).

Conservatives hate it when you point out that male entitlement fuels most of the violence in this country because it busts their narrative of the mentally ill white man vs the barbaric brown man on violence.

No, nott always. Some people find their sweetheart right out of the gate. For me, it took some patient sifting before I was sure I found my one, so I don’t regret being picky either. High standards, for the win!

We Hunted the Mammoth tracks and mocks the white male rage underlying the rise of Trump and Trumpism. This blog is NOT a safe space; given the subject matter -- misogyny and hate -- there's really no way it could be.